Search a question

Where a crypto-asset service provider (CASP) provides execution of orders for crypto-assets on behalf of clients (as defined in Article 3(1)(21) of MiCA), does the obligation under Article 78(5) of MiCA for the CASP to inform their clients about the possibility that their orders “might be executed outside a trading platform” and to obtain “the prior express consent of their clients before proceeding to execute their orders outside a trading platform” apply whenever a CASP’s order execution policy provides for the possibility that client orders might be executed outside of CASPs that are authorized in accordance with Article 59 of MiCA to provide the service of ‘operation of a trading platform for crypto-assets’ as defined in Article 3(1)(18) of MiCA?

In relation to the statement of continuous compliance with reporting and disclosure obligations as referred to in Annex IX, point IV, of Regulation (EU) 2017/1129, when is an issuer considered to have ‘continuous compliance’ and to which time period should the statement pertain (i.e. does the statement need to cover the entire period that the issuer’s securities have been admitted to trading)?

To qualify for the exemption set out in Article 1(5), point (ba), of Regulation (EU) 2017/1129, one condition is that the securities to be admitted to trading on a regulated market must not be issued in connection with a takeover by means of an exchange offer, a merger, or a division. Does that exemption refer to a takeover by means of an exchange offer that falls within the scope of Directive 2004/25/EC?

When applying the exemptions in Article 1(4)(da) and (db) as well as Article 1(5)(ba), when is an issuer considered to be subject to a restructuring or to insolvency proceedings?

Could non-EU entities, which are subject to the clearing obligation, be subject to the active account requirement?